LEGISLATIVE RECORD - HOUSE, April 27, 2004

LEGISLATIVE RECORD - HOUSE, April 27, 2004

ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FIRST LEGISLATURE

SECOND SPECIAL SESSION

39th Legislative Day

Tuesday, April 27, 2004

The House met according to adjournment and was called to order by the Speaker.

Prayer by Honorable Joanne T. Twomey, Biddeford.

National Anthem by Sarah and Leigh-Ann Esty, Gorham High School.

Pledge of Allegiance.

The Journal of Friday, April 16, 2004 was read and approved.

______

COMMUNICATIONS

The Following Communication: (H.C. 402)

MAINE STATE LEGISLATURE

AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333

COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE IMPLEMENTATION

OF PRIVATIZATION OF THE STATE'S

WHOLESALE LIQUOR BUSINESS

April 14, 2004

The Honorable Beverly C. Daggett, President

Maine State Senate

The Honorable Patrick Colwell, Speaker

Maine House of Representatives

State House

Augusta, Maine 04333

Dear President Daggett and Speaker Colwell:

This letter is to inform you that the Committee to Study the Implementation of Privatization of the State's Wholesale Liquor Business has completed its work and submitted its report, pursuant to Joint Order, Senate Paper 552, S "A" S-264.

Sincerely,

S/Senator Kenneth T. Gagnon, Chair

S/Representative Joseph E. Clark, Chair

READ and with accompanying papers ORDERED PLACED ON FILE.

______

REPORTS OF COMMITTEE

Pursuant to Joint Rule 309

From the Committee on TAXATION on Bill "An Act To Provide Property Tax Relief to Maine Homeowners" (EMERGENCY)

(H.P. 1347) (L.D. 1824)

Received by the Clerk of the House on April 26, 2004, pursuant to Joint Rule 309.

On motion of Representative LEMOINE of Old Orchard Beach, TABLED pending FURTHER ACTION and later today assigned.

______

The following items were taken up out of order by unanimous consent:

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

The following matters, in the consideration of which the House was engaged at the time of adjournment Saturday, April 17, 2004, had preference in the Orders of the Day and continued with such preference until disposed of as provided by House Rule 502.

Joint Order, Authorizing the Joint Standing Committee on Education and Cultural Affairs To Report Out a Bill Regarding the Maine Learning Technology Plan

(S.P. 797)

- In Senate, READ and PASSED.

TABLED - April 2, 2004 (Till Later Today) by Representative CUMMINGS of Portland.

PENDING - PASSAGE.

On motion of Representative CUMMINGS of Portland, the Joint Order and all accompanying papers were INDEFINITELY POSTPONEDin NON-CONCURRENCE and sent for concurrence.

______

By unanimous consent, all matters having been acted upon were ORDERED SENT FORTHWITH.

______

Resolve, To Clarify Title to Land Related to the Waldo-Hancock Bridge Replacement (PUBLIC LAND)

(H.P. 1447) (L.D. 1947)

TABLED - April 12, 2004 (Till Later Today) by Representative RICHARDSON of Brunswick.

PENDING - FINAL PASSAGE.

Reported by the Committee on Engrossed Bills as truly and strictly engrossed. In accordance with the provisions of Section 23 of Article IX of the Constitution, a two-thirds vote of all the members elected to the House being necessary, a total was taken. 116 voted in favor of the same and 0 against, and accordingly the Resolve was FINALLY PASSED, signed by the Speaker and sent to the Senate.

______

By unanimous consent, all matters having been acted upon were ORDERED SENT FORTHWITH.

______

An Act To Conform the Maine Tax Laws for 2003 to the United States Internal Revenue Code (EMERGENCY)

(H.P. 1229) (L.D. 1651)
(C. "B" H-757)

TABLED - April 16, 2004 (Till Later Today) by Representative LEMOINE of Old Orchard Beach.

PENDING - PASSAGE TO BE ENACTED.

Reported by the Committee on Engrossed Bills as truly and strictly engrossed. This being an emergency measure, a two-thirds vote of all the members elected to the House being necessary, a total was taken. 122 voted in favor of the same and 0 against, and accordingly the Bill was PASSED TO BE ENACTED, signed by the Speaker and sent to the Senate.

______

By unanimous consent, all matters having been acted upon were ORDERED SENT FORTHWITH.

______

The House recessed until the Sound of the Bell.

______

(After Recess)

______

The House was called to order by the Speaker.

______

The following items were taken up out of order by unanimous consent:

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

The following matters, in the consideration of which the House was engaged at the time of adjournment yesterday, had preference in the Orders of the Day and continued with such preference until disposed of as provided by House Rule 502.

HOUSE DIVIDED REPORT - Majority (10) Ought Not to Pass - Minority (3) Ought to Pass as Amended by Committee Amendment "C" (H-809) - Committee on TAXATION on RESOLUTION, Proposing an Amendment to the Constitution of Maine Related to the Taxation of Personal Property

(H.P. 167) (L.D. 208)

TABLED - March 29, 2004 (Till Later Today) by Representative LEMOINE of Old Orchard Beach.

PENDING - Motion of same Representative to ACCEPT the Majority OUGHT NOT TO PASS Report.

Subsequently, the Majority Ought Not to Pass Report was ACCEPTED and sent for concurrence. ORDERED SENT FORTHWITH.

______

HOUSE REPORT - Ought to Pass as Amended by Committee Amendment "A" (H-855) - Committee on BUSINESS, RESEARCH AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT on Bill "An Act To Increase Returnable Beverage Container Redemption Rates"

(H.P. 931) (L.D. 1257)

TABLED - April 7, 2004 (Till Later Today) by Representative RICHARDSON of Brunswick.

PENDING - ACCEPTANCE OF COMMITTEE REPORT.

Subsequently, the Committee Report was ACCEPTED. The Bill was READ ONCE. Committee Amendment "A" (H-855) was READ by the Clerk.

Representative SULLIVAN of Biddeford PRESENTED House Amendment "A" (H-956) to Committee Amendment "A" (H-855), which was READ by the Clerk.

The SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the Representative from Gray, Representative Austin.

Representative AUSTIN: Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This a unanimous committee report. It was amended to address several pieces to a law that was passed last year. One of the elements is the Department of Agriculture's need to establish the parameters for the commingling agreements. Due to the budget situation the time frame was changed to 3/1/04 for this requirement to be met. The Department of Agriculture issued the memorandum in draft form at the end of January. This left the industry who thought that the rulemaking was underway with little time to respond. There is an agreement filed with the Department of Agriculture after that memorandum. It is still pending. These small businesses have every intention of commingling and complying with the law and have asked for the time to enable the regulatory state agency to work with them. To my knowledge, right up to this amendment it has just now been put forth. The agreement has been reached and was working forward on being facilitated with the Department of Agriculture. For that reason, I believe this amendment is unreasonable and it is an expectation to these parties that are involved. Please join me in saying goodbye to this amendment.

I would ask for a roll call.

Representative AUSTIN ofGray REQUESTED a roll call on the motion to ADOPT House Amendment "A" (H-956) to Committee Amendment "A" (H-855).

More than one-fifth of the members present expressed a desire for a roll call which was ordered.

The SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the Representative from Biddeford, Representative Sullivan.

Representative SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, Men and Women of the House. There are many things that I would like to say about this bill. This bill undoes the bill that we passed last year. LD 985 was a bill that we passed bipartisan to move the intention of the bottle bill forward and to also help the small businesses in your area to receive one-half penny for redemption. You have returned your bottles to your redemption centers. You see the workers in there. They are all manual workers having to throw bottles into about 300 different socks. It was decided that this was not what we wanted to do. We changed some things last year in LD 985. It was passed. It said that we were going to go to a commingling agreement. A commingling agreement means that companies can mix their products. Pepsi cans of 12 oz size and Coke cans and all other cans are put in, Sprite and Mountain Dew. All of those will go together. It is the only way that a redemption center can receive any increase for doing the business. This is what the State of Maine did in order to clean up the environment. When we passed minimum wage increases, they have to pay them. When CMP or Bangor Hydro or any of the other electrical companies increase fees, they have to pay them. When we pass sewer fees and everything else, redemption centers have to pay them.

Those little redemption centers, people said that there are too many. We put an agreement on that they would now have to be licensed. You can't start one just because you think you would like to go and collect bottles.

I would disagree with the good Representative lead from Gray, Representative Austin. It is not about little companies. This is about their companies. They are not small business. They have a very powerful lobbyist group. They said that they didn't understand commingling. Let me tell you what Jeff Payne said when he came before us April 10, 2003, this is when we were looking at LD 985 on commingling. "My name is Jeff Payne. I am president of National Distributors. I would like the committee to consider the impractical nature of what these so-called arrangements are asking us to do as a business. Basically this legislation mandates that we get in bed with our competitor and arrange for us to pick up their empties and for them to pick up our empties. From there things get really murky." They understood perfectly well what needed to happen by March 1. In fact, I find it hard to believe that the beer company couldn't understand when Coke and Pepsi, two business enemies understood so well, that they were ready to go March 1. If you were ready to go March 1, you didn't need to pay that half penny, because you were helping the redemption centers by cutting down their costs.

First of all, what you are doing is you are saying as a body that if this amendment does not pass with Coke and Pepsi, that you were foolish to do what the Maine State Legislature told you to do. More importantly, you have to go home to the people in your communities and your districts and say that we know it has been 11 years since you have had a raise and we know we passed a bill that gave you one. Look, let's be honest, the lobbyists have been talking and the beer companies can't afford to pay you that. They need to have another seven months. I am willing to give them the seven months which is part of the bill. I am willing to give them the fact that the State of Maine in the sheet is simply an escape thing. It is $170,000 a month for seven months each month. That is a lot of money that the State of Maine could use right now. I am willing to give that up, because after all the beer companies need more help than the State of

Maine. I am willing to forego and waive all penalties that LD 985 put into place if they weren't ready by March 1 of this year.

What I, in good conscience, cannot waive is a half penny to small businesses, redemption centers who decided to make this bottle bill work for 20 years. Without the redemption centers, it doesn't work. Do the beer companies care if the bottle bill doesn't work? Go back and look in the archives, they never supported the bottle bill to begin with. The redemption centers are the workhorses. They are the ones that make it work. You voted last year and stood up there and had it called a great compromise. The Representative from Scarborough stood up last year. He talked about how this was a good move forward. It was. LD 985 actually started out with a 3 cent increase and ended up at a half penny. Redemption people were happy to take the half penny. In good conscience all my amendment does is move the half penny retroactive to March 1, exactly what we voted as a law last year.

I can go back and say to my redemption centers that we heard your voice. I have people who have written me from Old Town, Knox, Dixfield, Mexico, York, Biddeford and Saco asking me to please support the redemption people. No, you don't see them out here. They are busy taking the returnables from your communities. They don't pay high-priced lobbyists. They don't have a lot of money to give PACs. They make our Maine bottle bill work. We promised them that in legislation. Talk about promises.

We passed this bill last year. One group took us at our word. Another group laughed in our face and wrote letters to the redemption centers saying we are going to delay this. We are not going to do it. I can prove those letters. I can show you the letters. They knew. They weren't confused. I ask you to support this amendment. All it does is say that we will give you to October 1, beer companies, except for the half penny.

There is one other thing I want to say. This came out of committee originally in a much different note. I did a foolish thing first time in three years. I took a vacation with my husband. It went back to committee and the other chamber rewrote it. I agreed to everything in it except the redemption piece. This is not as it appears. It really does move the bottle bill backward. It takes two studies that we have done here, both in the 119th and the 120th. It also takes us back. I ask you to support this amendment for a half penny and give the beer companies everything else they want. Maine, the redemption centers and the very integrity of this institution of us passing a law last year and never even giving it a chance to work before we turned it down for the little guy. I ask you to support my amendment.

The SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the Representative from Scarborough, Representative Clough.

Representative CLOUGH: Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. As most of you know, I served on that study commission for the bottling bill for two years and worked hand in hand with representatives of the industry and the redemption centers and the people from the beer and wine industry. They were at the table throughout and supported the effort that we put forward. I think we are very important in coming up with something that was workable.

Earlier in this session we voted on this, LD 1257, as it was presented and passed it. I think that was a good move and the best move right now is to vote against this amendment and move forward with what in good faith was presented to us earlier. Thank you.

The SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the Representative from Raymond, Representative Bruno.

Representative BRUNO: Mr. Speaker, May I pose a question through the Chair?

The SPEAKER: The Representative may pose his question.

Representative BRUNO: Mr. Speaker, Men and Women of the House. I would like to ask this question to the chair of the committee. Isn't it true that the State of Maine was also supposed to reimburse a half a cent on March 1? Have they done that?

The SPEAKER: The Representative from Raymond, Representative Bruno has posed a question through the Chair to the Representative from Biddeford, Representative Sullivan. The Chair recognizes that Representative.

Representative SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, Men and Women of the House. In answer to that, unless it was done while I was gone and I have missed that one too, then no. The bottle bill is one that is done between the initiators of the deposit and with the redemption centers. The only thing that the State of Maine would get into is the sheet, which is that escape sheet of redemption. It is a very confused matter. All of the bottles that are not returned, you go in and buy a six-pack of Pepsi. I know we are all Pepsi or Coke drinkers here. If you choose to throw those cans away or you take them out of state or you do something awful like throw them overboard or whatever, you paid the 5 cents to your local grocery store or your mom-and-pop convenience store and that money is collected and given back to the companies. In this case, I think I used Pepsi as an example. Pepsi becomes the keeper of that 5 cents. That is the sheet that would have gone back to the State of Maine and that is the $170,000 figured on just the beer per month that will be kept.

Under the original bill and even under the amendment under the original LD 985 and under the bill that you are looking at now LD 1257, if you entered into a commingling agreement, you were allowed to keep that sheet money. It went back to the coffers of the companies. In this case, for seven months the beer companies will be keeping the half penny that they would have paid the redemption centers and they will be keeping all sheet money. That is basically figured on an average, figured by RSVP, the largest redemption center out of the Portland and South Portland area. It was $170,460 per month. You multiply that by seven months that we are extending this money and the beer companies have quite a bit in their pockets that would have gone to state coffers. That is the only money that would have gone to state coffers.